Hacker News Reader

I wonder how many Spanish speakers got banned for discussing Vantablack at the time.

Pilots flying an Airbus get called a “retard” every time they land!

Even worse: they cannot get open mental healthcare for this without loosing their license.

Loose-loose-situation.

retar dio

In Chinese there's a common word that sounds like a particularly offensive racial slur to the untrained American ear. I've seen Chinese speakers called out for this in person, but everything got straightened out pretty quickly. This was pre-social media, but it's not hard to imagine a social media uproar over it these days.

Enjoy the uproar then https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-54107329.amp

This prof lost a gig

To me it feels like society is finally moving on from this insane over emphasis on finding things to be offended by and identity culture bs. I’m really hoping it peaked in the lockdown when people really had nothing better to do.

It is quite striking and bizarre the first time you’re in an extended conversation, and hear it over and over.

Surprised someone was called out though as all the social cues around should be enough to sense no ill intent.

那个 (nèige)[1]

It does stick out of Mandarin speech to the US English speaker, but it's typically pretty obvious from context that it's not related to the slur. It's never been worth more than a giggle when growing up, I'm spending like 100x more time on thinking about it right now than I have cumulatively in my life, despite having grown up around Chinese people.

[1]: https://resources.allsetlearning.com/chinese/grammar/The_fil...

> because the word for delay in French is offensive in English

It's also the word for delay in English.

It's also not offensive in English, even though some virtue signalers insist on taking offense to it.

Right. I made a reference to educational development being retarded due to COVID restrictions and the very people you'd expect to be offended were of course offended.

Perhaps because virtually no one uses the term in that context anymore. It is often best to avoid ambiguity when posting online.

My own experience is the exact opposite. Out of all the times in my life I can recall ever having heard the word "retarded" used, I cannot think of any reason to suspect that any of them were meant as anything other than a synonym for "idiotic".

Which, of course, also referred to clinical mental disability at some point in history. As did "moronic", "imbecilic" and others. But nowadays they're really all just strong forms of "stupid".

Even in contexts where generic insults directed at people are not tolerated, it should be acceptable to recognize stupid ideas as such.

I think you've misunderstood, then. The GP's comment was using it in the technical sense (slowed/delayed, not the common "that's so dumb" form you've observed).

Ah. The comment was:

>Right. I made a reference to educational development being retarded due to COVID restrictions and the very people you'd expect to be offended were of course offended.

I misread that, and interpreted "retarded" as being a subjective judgment applied to the restrictions.

That said, the reading "[the process of] educational development has a mental disability" is utterly incoherent, so I still see no reasonable justification for taking offense.

I think it's important to remember the real meaning of words. If you know language better, you can understand a lot more information, and you can express yourself better. Knowing the meaning and origin of words give you great insights into things.

Just because some childish people are misusing the word for some time, we shouldn't just ditch it like that. Words go back a long time.

We should just remove the negative use of it. And we do that by growing up, not by banning words.

Mechanics might retard or advance the ignition timing in an engine.

Nah it’s offensive. Just because you don’t take issue doesn’t mean it doesn’t hurt others.

Using it as a noun or in name-calling is offensive, as a verb it isn't.

Oh yeah? Why?

I’m glad we’re moving on from the world where everyone would constantly be yelling “You’re hurting me! You’re hurting me!”.

They're not suggesting that they don't take issue, and so they don't need to take offense seriously.

They're suggesting that the people who conceivably might take issue generally don't and are instead being patronized by and condescended to by privileged, unaffiliated outsiders who assume -- without consent -- to speak on their behalf. And they don't take those people seriously.

It's totally reasonable to disagree with that view, but it's the not the same view your reply tries to engage with.

No, you’re expressing a different, more lucid point of view (“the people who conceivably might take issue generally don’t”), which can be engaged with. For example, I would argue that it’s reasonable to take offense on behalf of people who can’t be part of the conversation at hand. (Otherwise it would be fine for whites to spew racist slurs in a group of only white people. If we disagree on that, we’re having the wrong conversation.) I would also point out that taking offense on behalf of others is a time-honored practice (“nobody says that about my little brother and gets away with it!”) But the GP (GGP?) did not say “the people who conceivably might take issue generally don’t.” They didn’t say “no one has standing to be offended by this term.” They just said “it’s not offensive” about a term that is offensive enough that we’re having an entire argument about it. That’s schoolyard-level discourse.

The thing is, you wouldn't use the slur except to invoke the mean-spiritedness that the people who find the slur offensive associate with the word. If you're using it because you think like-minded people will find it funny that you're using a term other people find offensive, that's still precisely the same mean-spiritedness.

An alternative is to use “on the spectrum”. For example, your s.o. or someone else you’re arguing with is getting on your nerves so you say: “Hey! are you on the spectrum today or what?”

Reminds me of:

Priest: “You have been found guilty by the elders of the town of uttering the name of our lord as so as a BLASPHEMER you are to be stoned to death.”

[…]

Priest: “BLASPHEMY! He said it again!”

Old man: “I don’t think it ought to be blasphemy. I just said ‘Jehova’”

Priest: “You said it again! You’re only making it worse!”

Old man: “Making it worse!? How can I make it worse!? Jehova, Jehova, Jenova!”

https://youtu.be/SYkbqzWVHZI

So it's not offensive. Just because it hurts you doesn't mean others meant it that way.

It's widely regarded as a slur.

hi retard, good post :)

Offense is all about context. It is objectively quite offensive when used as a term for a person. (“Objectively” works here because a word being offensive is determined by how people view it. The views are subjective but the prevalence of those view is not.)

There's offensive use of that term in English, for sure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retard_(pejorative)

Have you ever seen someone use the slur without intending the same mean-spiritedness that the "virtue signalers" are taking offense to?

As someone who works adjacent to rail operations, it's somewhat common to see used in a completely straight-faced and serious way.

Plant failing to be properly retarded is a somewhat regular cause of near-miss safety incidents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retarder_(railroad)

That's the thing. They aren't taking offense to mean-spiritedness directed at the person being referred to that way, except in cases where that person actually does have such an intellectual disability. And such language is normally directed at people of ordinary intelligence, to call them out for failing to think things through when they're perfectly capable of it.

There are, and should be, contexts where insulting people is socially acceptable and where such insults should not be censored. And no matter what words you use (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/euphemism_treadmill), it's fundamentally impossible to get rid of the idea that a lack of (demonstrated) intelligence is inherently negative.

(It's noteworthy to me that the same activists don't seem to be able to identify any terms denoting lack of physical strength that are inherently offensive - except insofar as they invoke gender stereotypes. Why should it be any less objectionable to call someone a "weakling", for example?)

The criticism of the target’s intelligence or competence isn’t the mean-spiritedness I’m referring to. I’m referring to the deliberate and inherent mean-spiritedness towards people with intellectual disabilities that the slur is explicitly invoking.

>I’m referring to the deliberate and inherent mean-spiritedness towards people with intellectual disabilities that the slur is explicitly invoking.

I disagree that any such thing is invoked. It seems that you believe that when the word "retard" is used in these contexts, that it's meant to describe a person with an intellectual disability. I think it's merely intended to describe someone of low intelligence, which neither necessarily qualifies as nor is necessarily caused by a disability.

Nor do I agree that it's mean-spirited in a way that, say, the word "stupid" isn't. It's just more intense.

I don't think insult should be socially accepted, it shouldn't, it's not a nice thing. Rudeness, impoliteness, offense, why would we socially accept them?

Freedom and cencorship is another thing. You have the freedom to be rude and impolite, and it shouldn't be censored. But yeah you shouldn't expect people to like you or listen to you.

>Rudeness, impoliteness, offense, why would we socially accept them?

Because multiple kinds of social space exist, and some people enjoy being able to interact with each other that way and are happy to accept being the butt of the joke their fair share of the time.

Ah yeah, you are right, there are people that have been exposed to it so much that they think it is normal, and a necessary part of life.

Well you know, things can change. In the past it was a family outing to go watch a beheading. That was normal for them and good entertainment. And they would have used the same arguments as you to somebody critical about it.

And you're right, it is a valid choice, and if you really enjoy being humiliated, by all means, you have the freedom to.

I do think eventually when the rest of the people have grown up and moved on to much more intelligent endeavors, that you might start to think differently too. But maybe not, everyone has their own interests.

This sort of dismissiveness is not helpful to your cause.

What am I dismissing?

Haha, wait, are you offended? I thought you were one of those people who would enjoy that.

Sure. I have a 50 year old friend who takes care of her retarded brother. When describing him and what she does, she simply calls him retarded, because he is, and people know what that word means.

One of the kindest women I know, but she doesn't bead around the bush or have time for euphemisms.

Idiot, retard, mentally handicapped, ect. It is all doomed to be a euphemistic treadmill because they can and are used as an insult. The insulting part isn't the word used, but the comparison drawn. Give it 10 years or so and whatever the current word is will also be out of favor as a pejorative.

Already the case - disabled is now lesser abled or something.

It’s pretty retarded.

To be clear, I am arguing the idea that banning words stops people from being mean, not for using those words needlessly.

These words have non-offensive uses outside of schools and offices.

Language is what we make of it, it's not a fixed concept. If people take offense to it then it's offensive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzdpxKqEUAw

As Stephen Fry said: "So fucking what?".

A thumbs-up gesture is offensive in the Middle East, should it be banned world-wide?

Funnily enough the original example upthread was the use of the word "retard" which is harmless in French, which ended up getting the user in trouble.

dang, can i can him a retard and not get flagged or banned? hah

I've only ever seen it used to mean "delay" in occasional technical contexts, e.g. "fire retardant material", in practice it seems to be mostly a noun that means "stupid person".

The words have the same meaning - "person with slowed down intellectual development"

"Developing intellect slowly" implies they're going to reach full intelligence at some point.

"Retard" means "thick", in this context, not "will get there eventually".

The technical definition is not how the euphemism is used.

It's not a euphemism. It's an epithet.

There's an interesting etymology of "retarded". Also "idiot", "imbecile", "moron", etc.

These were clinical classifications, initially used in the early days of psychology and sometimes overlapping discredited ideas like eugenics. But these were diagnoses -- you could be determined to be an idiot, which was worse than being an imbecile, which was worse than being a moron -- by a respected doctor.

Of course, schoolyard kids got a hold of the terms and used them to disparage their (probably cognitively healthy) peers. And so with "retarded" and "disabled" etc.

But "retarded" just means "slowed or delayed". Developmentally speaking, especially when surrounded by other kids in your same age group, that's a noticeably difficult thing to be.

It does not mean (and never meant) that you are certain to reach full cognitive ability eventually. Flights that are delayed are sometimes also cancelled.

Retarded timing is a common term in reference to a car’s ignition. And in biology, retarded growth is often used.

you can also retard the thrust levers

This is different than the fact-checking, and has to do with automated moderation algorithms (which generally suck), which are continuing (because advertisers want them).

Yes, it is, but the salient point that I felt was clear in that post was to demonstrate that these systems don't work well, and that such systems have such a poor understanding of context and circumventions as to be rendered ineffective if not totally counterproductive. I'm fully aware such mechanisms aren't going anywhere, right now, but at least Meta is acknowledging the fact that at present, they aren't really providing the user experience they intended.

That aside, I find it offensive a little bit that Meta has taken it upon themselves to decide what the "right" discourse is that their users want to see, and would rather they create a mechanism to let users decide for themselves - which this does at least outwardly appear to be a move towards. They've also in the last few years toned down or removed some of the auto-modding in private groups, and shifted that responsibility towards its community members and moderators - which was also a similarly good step.

> auto-modding in private groups

that's very different and a case where the closed community should bear that responsibility

but as far global FB community -- which doesn't really exist (there is no "community", just users) -- or, more precisely, what ends up in people feeds, the fact checking was a good thing because a lot of people consume news that way; so this is a big step in the wrong direction

Some time around 2011, the Apple App store was warning me about rude words in the app description; unfortunately it was warning me about the German word "Knopf" which isn't rude. I think what happened is the English rude word list was translated into German, rather than just replaced with local rude words.

Button?

The word "knob" would also translate as "Knopf" in the sense of button, while also having a euphemistic meaning of "penis".

German native speaker here.

in no region or context does Knopf mean anything offensive, especially not "penis".

Yes, I know. My words seem to be easily misunderstood. The claim is that:

1) "knob" *in English* can mean "penis"

2) This is why "knob" was on the English rude words list

3) It looks like a rude word list containing "knob" was translated without context, so that the word "knob" became "Knopf" even though "Knopf" isn't rude.

Wäre es andersherum gewesen, wäre es so, dass „Schlange“ sowohl <<en:queue>> als auch <<en:penis>> bedeutet, und wenn „queue“ in einer englischen Liste mit Schimpfwörtern stünde, wären die meisten Leute sehr verwirrt.

ah. das kam so nicht rüber, thanks for clarifying.

Same would probably happen when talking in a video about the French theorem proofer called Coq.

As someone who speaks French this made me chuckle